# Concat vs temporal

> Two self-hosted projects, compared on the numbers selfhost.directory tracks live: score, popularity, release cadence and setup effort.

| | Concat | temporal |
|---|---|---|
| Score | 82/100 | 82/100 |
| Rank in category | #1 of 18 in Video Processing | #1 of 1 in Workflow |
| GitHub stars | 12 498 | 24 054 ✓ |
| Stars, last 30 days | +2 499 ✓ | +776 |
| Stable releases, 12 months | 6 | 11 ✓ |
| Latest release | v0.2.8 · 20 Oct 2026 ✓ | v1.30.8 · 12 Oct 2026 |
| Setup | Easy ✓ | Advanced |
| Official Docker image | No | Yes ✓ |
| License | AGPL-3.0 | MIT |
| Main language | Rust | Go |

## Which one should you pick?

Concat and temporal score the same (82/100), so the choice comes down to the details below.

temporal ships more often: 11 stable releases in the past year, against 6 for Concat.

If you want the quickest setup, Concat is easier to run; temporal needs more configuration.

Concat is growing faster right now (+2 499 stars in 30 days).

## Details

- [Concat](https://selfhost.directory/project/concat) (markdown: https://selfhost.directory/project/concat.md)
- [temporal](https://selfhost.directory/project/temporal) (markdown: https://selfhost.directory/project/temporal.md)

---
Source: https://selfhost.directory/compare/concat-vs-temporal